Giftedness and Identification

Year 2016, Volume: 3 Issue: 1, 1 - 8, 15.06.2016

Andrew P. Johnson

Abstract

An athletic analogy can be used to help address issues related to the definition
and identification of students in gifted education. Gifted athletes are those who
are capable of outstanding performance within an athletic domain. This view of
giftedness reflects Gardner’s (1983) definition of intelligence. And, while
standardized measures indicate specific attributes which may enhance
performance, students with outstanding talent are identified by their
performance within the context of a specific domain. Thus, a more holistic
concept of giftedness and a matching procedure for identification should be
applied in order to help develop a wider variety of talents. 

Keywords

giftedness, identification

Giftedness and Identification

Abstract

An athletic analogy can be used to help address issues related to the definition and identification of students in gifted education. Gifted athletes are those who are capable of outstanding performance within an athletic domain. This view of giftedness reflects Gardner’s (1983) definition of intelligence. And, while standardized measures indicate specific attributes which may enhance performance, students with outstanding talent are identified by their performance within the context of a specific domain. Thus, a more holistic concept of giftedness and a matching procedure for identification should be applied in order to help develop a wider variety of talents.

Keywords

giftedness, identification, athletic

References

• Bruner, J. (1977). The process of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Chi, M.T., Feltovish, P.J., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation ofphysics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 121-152.
• Corpley, A. (2000). Defining and measuring creativity: Are creativity tests worth using?Roeper Review, 23, 72-79.
• Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1994). The domain of creativity. In D. Feldman, M.Csikzentmihalyi, & H. Gardner (Eds.). Changing the world: A framework for the study ofcreativity. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishing.
• DeGroot, A.D. (1965). Thought and choice in chess. The Hague: Mouton.
• Davis, G.A., & Rimm, S.B. (1998) Education of the gifted and talented (4th ed.). NeedhamHeights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
• Feldman, D.H., Csikzentmihalyi, M., & Gardner, H. (1994). Changing the world: Aframework for the study of creativity. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishing.
• Feldhusen, J.F. (1995). Creativity: Knowledge base, metacognitive skills, and personalityfactors. Journal of Creative Behavior, 29, 255-268.
• Gallagher, J.J., & Gallagher, S.A. (1994). Teaching the gifted child (4th ed.). NeedhamHeights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
• Gardner, H. (1994). Creating minds. New York: Basic Books
• Lipshitz, A., & Waingortin, M. (1995). Getting out of ruts: A laboratory study of acognitive model of reframing. Journal of Creative Behavior, 29, 151-172.
• Lynch, M.D. & Harris, C.D. (2001). Fostering creativity in children, K-8. Boston, MA: Allynand Bacon.
• Marzano, R.J., Brandt, R.S., Hughes, C.S., Jones, B.F., Presseisen, B.R., Rankin, S.C., &Suhor, C. (1988). Dimensions of thinking. Alexandria, VA: The Association forSupervision and Curriculum Development.
• Maslow, A. (1971). The farther reaches of human nature. New York: Viking Press.
• Maslow, A. (1968). Toward a psychology of being (3rd ed.). New York. John Wiley andSons, Inc.
• May, R. (1975). The courage to create. New York. Norton.
• Miller, J. (2001). The holistic curriculum (2nd ed). Buffalo, NY: University of Toronto Press
• Naglieri, J. & Kaufman, J. (2001). Understanding intelligence, giftedness, and creativityusing PASS theory. Roeper Review, 23, 151-156.
• Piirto, J. (1994). Talented children and adults: Their development and education. New York: Macmillan.
• Rogers, C. (1961). On becoming a person. Boston, MA. Houghton Mifflin Company. Starko, A. J. (2005). Creativity in the classroom: Schools of curious delight (3rd. ed). Mahwah,NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Sternberg, R.J. & Grigorenka, E. (2000). Teaching for successful intelligence. ArlingtonHeights, IL: Skylight Professional Development.
• Sternberg, R.J., & Lubart, T. (1991). Creative giftedness: A multivariate investmentapproach. Gifted Child Quarterly, 37, 7-15.
• Sternberg, R.J. Williams, W.M. (2002). Educational psychology. Boston, MA: A PearsonEducation.
• Swartz, R.J., & Perkins, D.N. (1990). Teaching thinking: Issues and approaches. PacificGrove, CA: Midwest Publication.
• Torrance, E. P. (1993). Understanding creativity: Where to start? Psychological Inquiry, 4,232-234.
• Torrance, E.P. (1999). Torrance Test of Creative Thinking: Norms and technical manual.Beaconville, IL. Scholastic Testing Services.Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. New York: Harcourt,